Was Trump Junior Framed?

Some people do not understand why we believe informed citizens should be very weary of the “official” narrative coming out of Washington with regard to Trump and Russia. The often brilliant Justin Raimondo, lays out an excellent case for skepticism below.

Are Trump and Putin buddies? We don’t know. Did they collude? We don’t know. Are there many people in the establishment who want anything BUT peace with Russia? Yes. Do the neocons want to expand NATO and generally support a German dominated European Union (that is hostile to Russia for historical reasons)? Yes. Do the neocons want us to intervene even more in Syria? Yes. Was Clinton friendly to the neoconservatives? Absolutely. Do the neocons fear that they will be marginalized by Trump’s post-Cold war stance? Yes, they fear that very very much.

Is Trump generally an ass? Yeah, that can probably be said. Does Trump have deeply crony tendencies? Yes. But does Trump pose an existential threat to many people who have built their careers working the Washington DC machine? Oh hell yes. And that is why we see the venom. People’s reputations and power are on the line and they aren’t going to be taken out by someone they consider a buffoon and who is from outside of the “club.” Or perhaps “court” would be a better word.

Fundamentally I see the whole Trump thing as the “cool kids” pissed that their world got blown up.

Of course, as we’ve said many times now, we can always be wrong. Perhaps the assertions of the partisans are all true. Perhaps they are partially true. Regardless, partially true, or totally true, we will always pursue and report the truth. So let’s pursue it it.

And speaking of truth, one truth has held my entire life. Never trust the “cool” kids.


The drama now playing out in the headlines has all the same elements: foreign agents plotting to sway the nation’s destiny, the looming threat of war, and dirty tricks aplenty. Speaking of which: just how, exactly, did the three anonymous sources cited by the New York Times come to possess Donald Trump, Jr.’s emails? It is a measure of the Deep State’s desperation that, by this device, they have blown their cover and openly, brazenly, come out as the coup plotters they are. Yes, rumors abound that the sources are in the White House, and this may be superficially true: but of course, unlike Don Junior, the actual sources are smart enough to use go-betweens.

As the machinations and murky allegiances of various swamp creatures come to light, the main players are so much like the characters out of a novel that one wonders if Vidal isn’t up there – or, perhaps, down there – pounding away at some supernatural word-processor, his creation demonically translated into real events.

There is Don Junior, the fresh-faced and rather obtuse presidential progeny, who walks straight into the arms of the clownish Bob Goldstone, a former British tabloid journalist and events promoter, who set up the fateful meeting. There is Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Russian lawyer who previously worked with Fusion GPS, the dirty tricks firm employed by the Never Trump crowd that came up with the salacious “dirty dossier,” claiming that Trump had been compromised by Russian intelligence.

As Ernest Cuneo put it in The Golden Age, he had to play “both sides of the fence” in order to pull off the hijacking his British paymasters required, and this old ploy may well have played out in this instance.

There’s the matter of how Veselnitskaya got into the country, having been initially denied a visa by the State Department and then given special dispensation allowing entry. In her affidavit stating why she should be allowed to enter, she said that she was representing a Russian company, Prevezon, in a money-laundering case brought by the US Department of Justice. In this task she was working alongside Fusion GPs, which had been hired by Prevezon to assist in the case. No doubt Veselnitskaya’s history with the folks at Fusion GPs will eventually come out, but they are resistingdemands for documents by Sen. Chuck Grassley, citing their First Amendment rights as “journalists.” Given what “journalists” have become these days, one can see their point regardless of the legal technicalities.

Click here for the article.